Wow, 70% for PC Gamer for a title like this?? Thats like saying it sucks completely. Well, I know I am getting F.E.A.R., I mean, you couldn't keep me from that game, but I was definately considering this-and unless some more reviews really sound positive this has really sort of curbed my enthusiasm.

Wow, 70% for PC Gamer for a title like this?? Thats like saying it sucks completely.

Very true. PC Gamer is the IGN of print magazines.

Of course, they gave Jeff Vogel's Avernum like a 15%, or something. The article was not about the game at all, but about how Jimmi Hendrix died of vomit asphyxiation, and I guess we were supposed to infer that playing this excellent indie RPG classic would make us suffer a similar fate.

For the record, I'll fall on my sword for this one so everyone can rest assured they'll hear it from the horse's mouth soon enough. If no one else buys it here based on PC Gamer saying ANYTHING about it, that's just silly. While I may disagree with a lot of the crap IGN doles out, I tend to read PC Gamer's thoughts on games like I do the comics - usually good for a laugh.

Everyone touts Quake as the end-all of multi, but I gotta tell ya that I have played nothing else everyday but FEAR multi since the demo hit. I simply cannot get enough of this baby. The best imo. Quake? Quake who at this point.

And I agree, a super duper profile game like this getting 7/10 is not a good sign. I really want to see the opinions of single play really since that is my main interest in it in the first place. I may dabble in the multi but the previous versions did little for me in that regard.

A lot of people seem to be complaining about the lack of bots... I realize that having the "Quake" name implies a multiplayer/bot focus, but Quake 4 is the sequel to Quake 2 (which didn't have bots either and wasn't primarily multiplayer), not Quake 3.

A lot of people seem to be complaining about the lack of bots... I realize that having the "Quake" name implies a multiplayer/bot focus, but Quake 4 is the sequel to Quake 2 (which didn't have bots either and wasn't primarily multiplayer), not Quake 3.

Exactly. Here's the caveat regarding Q4 MP - it's exactly the same as what you've seen before. I noticed nothing new whatsoever other than skins, which means it's only a matter of time before either a modder or Raven releases a patch that adds bot functionality to it. The focus is on the SP, not the MP, which is what Quake Wars I think will address. I'm still interested in getting a group together once this hits, but as I said, I volunteer to take the Quake Challenge and confirm whether it's worth everyone picking up or not.

As for FEAR, talk about your no-brainer. Still haven't touched the MP on this one yet, so everyone here is going to be hella better at it than I once I have the game.

A lot of people seem to be complaining about the lack of bots... I realize that having the "Quake" name implies a multiplayer/bot focus, but Quake 4 is the sequel to Quake 2 (which didn't have bots either and wasn't primarily multiplayer), not Quake 3.

:lol:

Why didn't they name it Doom 4, then? I mean, it's the sequel to Doom 2.

Everyone touts Quake as the end-all of multi, but I gotta tell ya that I have played nothing else everyday but FEAR multi since the demo hit.

Quake was cool back when multiplayer deathmatch wasn't a part of every game under the sun. Since then, there are countless games that do multiplayer better than Quake. It's a quaint little nostalgic relic, but that's about it.

A lot of people seem to be complaining about the lack of bots... I realize that having the "Quake" name implies a multiplayer/bot focus, but Quake 4 is the sequel to Quake 2 (which didn't have bots either and wasn't primarily multiplayer), not Quake 3.

:lol:

Why didn't they name it Doom 4, then? I mean, it's the sequel to Doom 2.

Doom 1 and 2 had a storyline progression.

Quake 1 and Quake 2 had a story as well. Quake 3 : Arena was a bot-match game, much like Unreal Tournament. Quake 4 is a return to the "maps with a point" rather than a sandbox of death mentality.

Hrrm, let me revise that. Doom 1, 2 and Quake 1, 2 had you enter a map/maze and expected you to come out the other side. I think the word "story" doesn't quite fit properly.

Logged

"If it weren't for Philo T. Farnsworth, inventor of television, we'd still be eating frozen radio dinners." - Johnny Carson

OK, I'm not happy to hear this, but I will see if multplie reviews are similarly dissappointed. I don't ask much of an FPS (orginality ranks behind storyline in my cares for Single player FPS, which is to say, right at the bottom), and Raven has always done MOTS (or 'vanilla fps') well.

With Serious Sam 2 out this week, and Fear next week, I think my FPS craving is about to get fed Big Time. Fear for good story & atmosphere, SS2 for insane hyper-adrenaline fix, and if Quake 4 pans out ok, old-school fps. Hell I'll be happy. (Yes, I hate the phrase 'old-school' about as much as anyone, but in this case I'm sure my meaning is understood.)

Oh, I should point out that I read a good portion of the Evil Avatar thread: I have no problem killing my 1,000,001th nazi, robot, demon, or Robo-Demonic Zombie Nazi. But that's just me. AS I said, I'm easy to please in a FPS.

Yeah, what the hell happened to them anyway? They used to be my favorite PC gaming mag up until a few years ago, then their quality just started sinking further and further with each month. I made up my mind to cancel my sub when I noticed that the number of pages with ads on them outnumbered the pages with actual content. After that I emailed them and asked why their mag had went to shit, to which Vederman replied that "there just wern't that many good PC games coming out" and "they had to have that many ads to pay for the magazine" and "there really wasn't a whole lot of new content that they didn't already have". (*cough* bullshit *cough*) I replied with a two-page e-mail listing all the things I would love to see in their magazine, but never got another response after that.

They still send the magazine to me though, begging for money or "This will be your last issue!". They've been telling me that for at least a year, yet I still get a new issue in my mailbox every month.

Maybe so, but in this situation, it's Raven coming up with the game that uses id tech. I have faith in the Doom 3 engine. Is it fair so suggest that Raven didn't live up to their end of the bargain? Is that trolling too much?

Maybe so, but in this situation, it's Raven coming up with the game that uses id tech. I have faith in the Doom 3 engine. Is it fair so suggest that Raven didn't live up to their end of the bargain? Is that trolling too much?

If Q4 ends up sucking, then you would be perfectly correct and valid in stating that Raven didn't live up to their end of the bargain-unless Activision skimped them on time/money/whatever.